Printable View
But not every new release has to use the newest technology. Old tech can be refined and made easier and cheaper to produce with fewer faulty products, and these are generally released as an alternative to the biggest and best for people who don't feel like paying for the biggest and best. Just about every other branch of technology has different levels of products, and it's nice to see this finally being applied in some small way to consoles as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
At least Nintendo's new console will be small, quiet, and cool, which is something that can't really be accomplished with cutting edge tech. Hopefully, it'll be more reliable than the other consoles, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kedawa
How do you figure one thing being more reliable then the other in terms of next gen systems?
The Xbox is built pretty solid but last I recall it never sounded like a mac truck when it was running.
A lot of Xbox's do sound like jet engines though. You can even listen to the way the system loads a game during the match up screen in Halo 2 to figure out if you will be playing an old map, or new map.Quote:
Originally Posted by BonusKun
Old, proven tech is more reliable than cutting edge parts? Color me shocked.Quote:
Originally Posted by BonusKun
There is.Quote:
Originally Posted by sethsez
Its called "old consoles".
I hear what you're saying but Im not sold on this thing yet. Nintendo's output the past five years has been "rehash + fanservice", and unless you are totally in love with Nintendo this thing just doesnt have a whole lot going for it now - old hardware, untested gimmick, downloadable games, this is not exciting stuff. And while you might not be in the "buy hot shit demographic", I certainly am (though I try to resist) and a Xbox-level 480p console ain't gonna be that exciting in 2008. And that could hurt its longevity, whether you wanna admit it or not.
And y'all are acting like new technology is a fucking pariah or something - if you dont think the PS3 and 360 will drive new experiences you are naive. So many of my favorite games as of late just couldnt be done on more primitive hardware.
Well I just think of it in terms of why make something enmass if you're going to send it out broken?Quote:
Originally Posted by sethsez
Of course the old Playstation 1 systems were notorious with CD drive problems and went thru a ton of revisions. My Gamecube on the other hand has run quietly without any real problems other then a slight bit of dusting every couple of months but that's expected.
Oh and about your comment about the revolution selling like hotcakes at a $150.00 price point. I'd say that even at a starting price of $200.00, the damn things would still sell like crazy. America has always had a hardon for Nintendo no matter what they release.
Well, mostly because they aren't trying to pack $1000 worth of hardware into a $400 system, and therefore won't be cutting every corner to save money, but also because everything they're putting in the thing is pretty basic by comparison. The chips run at low clock rates and shouldn't get too hot, the optical drive is fairly standard, and there's no HDD.Quote:
Originally Posted by BonusKun
Nintendo's overall hardware quality has been better than any other manufacturer this gen as well, and I see no reason why that should change.
Sure, there are some problems with the cube's laser, but it's nothing compared to the myriad flaws in Sony's various PS2 models, or MS's continued use of substandard parts (foxconn power supplies, thomson and philips optical drives, 'stickered' hard drives).
Yes, but is it small?Quote:
The Xbox is built pretty solid but last I recall it never sounded like a mac truck when it was running.
Then I'll clarify: old, cheap technology that will actually have some support for the next few years. If the GC and Xbox weren't dead in the water and the PS2 slowly moving into the realm of shovelware games (just like the PSOne did at the end of its life cycle) then I wouldn't buy new hardware at all, but hey.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Without a doubt. And if it didn't cost half a grand to play those games I'd be right there with you. I'm not saying new technology isn't great, I'm saying new technology isn't $400 worth of greatness to me.Quote:
And y'all are acting like new technology is a fucking pariah or something - if you dont think the PS3 and 360 will drive new experiences you are naive. So many of my favorite games as of late just couldnt be done on more primitive hardware.
I'm not saying everyone here should love it or anything (it's definitely aiming for a demographic that doesn't include most people here), I'm just saying it's a good thing to have on the market right next to more expensive, more powerful hardware.
I thought America was the weakest region for Nintendo? I believe they were #2 this generation, but #3 in America. Perhaps because of all the American MS/PC gamers who jumped for MS.Quote:
Originally Posted by BonusKun
As to technology levels, I'd be happy if the current gen stayed for another 4-5 years, then upgrade to PS3-powered systems at that point for $150 per console. If the others want to go high-end for $500 and one manufacturer wants to go low end for $150, all the better. If they all stayed a full generation behind the technology, we'd lose a lot of gamers to PC.